Verizon Virginia LLC v. SCC
Syllabus
11/30/2023 In an appeal by a telecommunications company from a decision by the State Corporation Commission dismissing its petition for a declaratory judgment for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, the contention that the Commission has subject matter jurisdiction over this petition pursuant to Code §§ 33.2-1815(B) and 33.2-1821 is rejected, and the judgment of the Commission is affirmed.
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- res ipsa loquitur not applicable where plaintiff’s expert confirmed defendant’s testimony that negligence was not the only potential source of infection
- testimony of plaintiffs only expert inconclusive as to standard of care held insufficient to present prima facie case
- testimony that “there were two possible theories as to source of [plaintiffs] infection,” one entailing negligence and the other not, was insufficient to create a jury issue on proximate causation
- “Due to the great variety of infections and complications which, despite all precautions and skills, sometimes follow accepted and standard medical treatment, courts reject the notion that because [injury] follows a treatment an inference of negligence is to be made.”
- sufficiency of medical attendance and caliber of medical treatment
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.